Mixed_Brown
New member
To start with I'll give a little background
I am not a trinitarian, so don't believe Jesus is YHWH.
My reason for creating this thread isn't to debate if the trinity is true.
What I am asking is SHOULD certain scriptures be cited as trinity proof scriptures, when they have been proved to do no such thing countless times.
A few examples are
KJV 1 John 5: 7 - For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one
This is not in any early manuscript so is obviously a later addition to the text, so shouldn't be used as a proof text.
John 10:30 "I and the Father are one.”
This is discussing the union between the Father and Son. This is not saying they are one in being.
Again I am not creating this thread to debate the trinity. I am asking if scriptures like the ones cited above, (plus others) should continue to be used by trinitarians , although they clearly teach nothing at all about the trinity?
I'm sure even a trinitarians, many of you would agree that scriptures that are taken out of context or scriptures that have been misapplied shouldn't be used to support your claim.
As a trinitrian or non-trinitarian, are there other scriptures you feel shouldn't be used?
If you do feel they should still be used, why?
I am not a trinitarian, so don't believe Jesus is YHWH.
My reason for creating this thread isn't to debate if the trinity is true.
What I am asking is SHOULD certain scriptures be cited as trinity proof scriptures, when they have been proved to do no such thing countless times.
A few examples are
KJV 1 John 5: 7 - For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one
This is not in any early manuscript so is obviously a later addition to the text, so shouldn't be used as a proof text.
John 10:30 "I and the Father are one.”
This is discussing the union between the Father and Son. This is not saying they are one in being.
Again I am not creating this thread to debate the trinity. I am asking if scriptures like the ones cited above, (plus others) should continue to be used by trinitarians , although they clearly teach nothing at all about the trinity?
I'm sure even a trinitarians, many of you would agree that scriptures that are taken out of context or scriptures that have been misapplied shouldn't be used to support your claim.
As a trinitrian or non-trinitarian, are there other scriptures you feel shouldn't be used?
If you do feel they should still be used, why?